The manipulation of nature using modern biotechnology has resulted in the creation of Genetically Modified (GM) foods. There are states already enacting laws requiring the mandatory labeling of GM foods so that consumers can make informed choices as to what food to eat. However, on the flip side, the mandatory labeling of GM foods can also constitute non-tariff barriers as it can impose burdens on states that export GM foods. How should these two interests be balanced? This thesis takes the ambitious challenge of exploring whether the mandatory labeling of GM foods enacted under the government's protection of the consumers' right to information regarding what food to consume is consistent with the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, particularly the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (MT Agreement). This thesis holds the view that the WTO, an international organization established to promote trade liberalization, can incorporate protection of consumers' interests by including it within to the interpretation of "legitimate objective" contained in Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement. Rather, the heart of problem lies in the threshold setting of exempting mandatory labeling. In particular, the dispersed threshold should be adjusted hi order to solve this issue, this thesis contends that both the TBT Committee and the dispute settlement system should be utilized.

No description available.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / The study was conducted to examine the communication between the customer and the cashier at the point of purchase in the process of determining the impact of the labeling laws. This study used an inductive qualitative design for data collection and data analysis. Data from this study suggest that calorie counts on menu labels are discussed frequently between the customer and the cashier at the point of sale at fast-casual restaurants. The data found gives us a framework and rationale as to why previous research on the effectiveness of the calorie labeling law in the Affordable Care Act have yet to make a significant impact in reducing consumer’s total daily caloric intake when eating food away from the home and found three specific reasons as to why the calorie labeling law may not be working the way the government intended it to. First, consumers at fast-casual restaurants rely on the cashiers as calorie guides because they are not aware or knowledgeable about the recommended daily caloric intake and often underestimate the total calories in their meals. Secondly, the study’s findings indicate that when restaurants offer lower calorie choices and downsizing options like a “small pita” at Pita Pit instead of a “regular pita”, many consumers buy the downsized item or smaller portion but food chains are not downsizing their signature items. Third, the study examined if the cashiers are trained in any way to discuss new regulations and calorie count/nutritional value and not one cashier was trained specifically about the calorie labeling law and why certain foods on the menu have more calories than others even though they are influencing decision making. Conversations at the point of sale have been routinely ignored in research about the calorie labeling law and this research helps to understand the choices consumers are making with the newly implemented calorie labeling regulation. The results from this study helps us further advance our understanding as to why consumers make the food choices they do while eating at restaurants.